Online Human Risk Assessment at the Industrial Plants


Risks of the employee unsafe behavior associated with their abilities and personal qualities are considered. The methodology is presented in the article concerning the risk assessment of unsafe behavior using online assessment by knowledge tests, ability tests and a professional personality questionnaire Deep Safety developed by Detech. The results of the employee online assessment are presented. The analysis of the criterion sample showed that the level of abilities and the level of expression of safety competencies affects both the number of cases of unsafe behavior and the overall results of work. A positive correlation was also found between the level of verbal intelligence and the propensity for safe behavior. Four safety competencies have the greatest correlation with the actual severity of safe behavior — they are law-abiding (following the rules), adherence to principles (intolerance to violations), responsibility, non-conflict. The first three of them have a positive correlation, while employees who are examples of safe behavior demonstrate a higher level of conflict. This can be explained by the fact that when they encounter violations or unsafe behavior, they openly point out this, suppress violations not being afraid to go to confrontation in the interests of ensuring safety.

Online assessment is a fast and cost effective way of assessment, and, moreover, easily integrates with the professional tests and other assessment tools. We recommend that such an assessment be carried out in labor collectives with an interval of 1.5–2 years, which makes it possible to track the dynamics of indicators. One more advantage of this assessment system is that it allows not only to identify those who are prone to unsafe behavior, but to form the best strategy for interaction with the employee, to recruit labor collectives, in which, for example, the low law-abidingness of some employees would be compensated for by the high integrity of the manager and team-mates.

  1. Results of the year: the sphere of occupational safety. Available at: (accessed: Аugust 20, 2020). (In Russ.).
  2. World Statistic. The enormous burden of poor working conditions. Available at: (accessed: Аugust 20, 2020).
  3. Mazhkenov S.A. Personal System of Conscious Occupational Safety. Bezopasnost truda v promyshlennosti = Occupational Safety in Industry. 2018. № 3. pp. 51–56. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.24000/0409-2961-2018-3-51-56
  4. Huang Yu.H., Zohar D., Robertson M.M., Garabet A., Lee J., Murphy L.A. Development and validation of safety climate scales for lone workers using truck drivers as exemplar. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour. 2013. Vol. 17. pp. 5–19. DOI: 10.1016/j.trf.2012.08.011
  5. Ghahramani A., Khalkhali H.R. Development and Validation of a Safety Climate Scale for Manufacturing Industry. Safety and Health at Work. 2015. Vol. 6. Iss. 2. pp. 97–103. DOI: 10.1016/
  6. Olsen E. Exploring the possibility of a common structural model measuring associations between safety climate factors and safety behaviour in health care and the petroleum sectors. Accident Analysis & Prevention. 2010. Vol. 42. Iss. 5. pp. 1507–1516. DOI: 10.1016/j.aap.2010.02.002
  7. Ji Z., Pons D., Pearse J. Why Do Workers Take Safety Risks? — A Conceptual Model for the Motivation Underpinning Perverse Agency. Safety — MDPI. 2018. Vol. 4. № 24. pp. 1–23. DOI: 10.3390/safety4020024
  8. Monteiro de Castro M.L., Reis Neto M.T., Ferreira C.A.A., Gomes J.F.D.S. Values, motivation, commitment, performance and rewards: Analysis model. Business Process Management Journal. 2016. Vol. 22. № 6. pp. 1139–1169. DOI: 10.1108/BPMJ-09-2015-0132
  9. Chen C.F., Chen S.C. Scale development of safety management system evaluation for the airline industry. Accident Analysis & Prevention. 2012. Vol. 47. pp. 177–181. DOI: 10.1016/j.aap.2012.01.012
  10. Beus J.M., Dhanani L.Y., McCord M.A. A meta-analysis of personality and workplace safety: Addressing unanswered questions. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2015. № 100. pp. 481–498. DOI:10.1037/a0037916
  11. Johnson S.E. The predictive validity of safety climate. Journal of safety research. 2007. Vol. 38. Iss. 5. pp. 511–521. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsr.2007.07.001
  12. Hussin M.F., Wang B., Hipnie R. The reliability and validity of Basic Offshore Safety and Emergency Training knowledge test. Journal of King Saud University — Engineering Sciences. 2012. Vol. 24. № 2. pp. 95–105.
  13. Schneider B., Gonzalez-Roma V., Ostroff C., West M.A. Organizational climate and culture: Reflections on the history of the constructs in the journal of applied psychology. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2017. Vol. 102. № 3. pp. 468–482. DOI:10.1037/apl0000090
  14. Hofmann D.A., Burke M.J., Zohar D. 100 years of occupational safety research: From basic protections and work analysis to a multilevel view of workplace safety and risk. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2017. Vol. 102. № 3. pp. 375–388.
  15. Kim Y.H., Park J.S., Park M.J. Creating a culture of prevention in occupational safety and health practice. Safety and Health at Work. 2016. Vol. 7. Iss. 2. pp. 89–96. DOI:10.1016/
  16. Online assessment of candidates and staff. Available at: (accessed: Аugust 20, 2020). (In Russ.).
  17. Products. Available at: (accessed: Аugust 20, 2020). (In Russ.).
  18. Safety. Safety-Related Behavior in a Work Environment. Available at: (accessed: Аugust 20, 2020).
  19. SAFETY QUOTIENTTM EMPLOYER REPORT for Hiring, Training & Coaching. Available at: (accessed: Аugust 20, 2020).
  20. SHL Workplace Safety Solution | Operatives (R-7op). Available at: (accessed: Аugust 20, 2020).
DOI: 10.24000/0409-2961-2021-3-81-87
Year: 2021
Issue num: March
Keywords : occupational safety safety culture propensity for unsafe behavior safety competencies online personnel assessment tests personality questionnaire violations criterion sampling safety climate diagnostic value